Alarming statistics related to the impact of tree loss in tropical rainforests (World Resources Institute). This report needs to be clarified because the numbers represent not just CO2 emissions but “CO2 equivalent,” which adds in the warming effect of methane and other gases. On that basis the tree loss of this type represents 8% of the global total, a close third in line behind the comparable emissions of two nations, the US and China. Moreover, the annual rate has increased more than 50% in just the last five years, most of it since the Paris Agreement was signed. This is a huge problem that is not being sufficiently addressed in international discussions.
This was presumably because of the cialis usa online increased flow of blood into various prime areas of one’s penis and thus ultimately leading to a hard erection. Musli Safed offers effective levitra generika 40mg cure for reproductive disorders. Treatment of these vital components is a sildenafil for women must in the affordable price. Both mode of ingestion female levitra are alright due the effervescent nature of the pill.
—Mongabay has additional commentary about the report, including a map showing where losses of thistype are occurring in the central part of Africa, where Congo is by far the largest emitter.
–Also, just a reminder that the presidential election in Brazil on October 28 favors a candidate who has vowed to speed up the commercial development of the Amazon forest region. There is no power of enforcement in sight that could stop these things, if that is what national leaders decide they want. And there are some questions about the quality of moral leadership coming from a number of large nations elsewhere, who are not in position to complain.
—–
“The Hope at the Heart of the Apocalyptic Climate Change Report” (Foreign Policy journal). Along with their latest dire predictions, the world’s leading climate scientists offered a new path forward—but will anyone take it? “The IPCC is finally getting the message. Last week’s special report includes an exciting new scenario that—for the first time—does not rely on speculative technology. Developed by an international team of scientists, it projects that we can reduce emissions fast enough to keep under 1.5 degrees but only if we’re willing to fundamentally change the logic of our economy. Instead of growing industrial output at all costs, it proposes a simple alternative: that we start to consume less.” It is a great argument, though not a new one, and if you do the math it is pretty daunting. I am not sure ‘hope’ is the right word, maybe ‘long-overlooked remedy’ would be better. It’s a good article.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/10/18/the-hope-at-the-heart-of-the-apocalyptic-climate-change-report/
—–
Along these same lines, we get a reminder from Fast Company, based on another report from WRI, that meat is one of things that humans have to stop consuming. Not just stopping the upward projections, which are huge, but reversing current consumption to practically zero. Plant-based options are rapidly becoming a viable reality, so quitting meat might be easier than anyone thinks.
—–
“The Case for Climate Pessimism” (New Republic). This article presents arguments that it is better to face the future with courage rather than resorting to a kind of hope that is based on unwarranted optimism. Kate Marvel, who is a climate scientist, has an unusually positive attitude for someone who is essentially pessimistic about any guarantee of a happy ending. Genuine action is most likely to be undertaken by those who have the right kind of courage.
–For a more in-depth message from Kate, here is something she wrote last March, including a glimpse into the physics of climate change:
Carl